ISSUE BRIEF JUNE 2018 A RECORD OF BIGOTRY AND HATE: DONALD TRUMP’S LONG HISTORY OF ANTI-MUSLIM ANIMUS In December 2015, then-candidate Donald Trump told an enthusiastic crowd of supporters at a campaign rally in South Carolina that he was “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”1 This campaign platform followed years of documented anti-Muslim statements made by Trump and laid the groundwork for his repeated attempts to enact a Muslim ban that began just one week after his inauguration in January 2017.2 Each iteration of President Trump’s signature Muslim ban policy has since been blocked by federal courts, but the Supreme Court in December 2017 allowed the current version to go into full effect while lower appellate courts considered the merits of several ongoing legal challenges thereto.3 In April 2018, the Supreme Court itself heard oral argument on the ban’s legality,4 and its decision is expected this coming June. Even before the ban went into full effect, however, President Trump’s attempts to put one in place, along with his cuts to the refugee program and implementation of various “extreme vetting” measures, had already resulted in a significant decline in Muslims entering the United States.5 As a private citizen, as a candidate, and as President, Trump has continued to make an unbroken chain of anti-Muslim statements—many of which amount to a long-term effort aimed at linking Islam and Muslims with terrorism at any available opportunity. These statements form a clear record of the religious animus that has driven the policies Trump has pursued from the Oval Office. Trump has made this animus clear through his rhetoric as a private citizen and presidential candidate, his defense of the Muslim ban and related policies, the manner and form of his use of the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” and variations thereof, and his promotion of false and incendiary anti-Muslim propaganda from his Twitter account. This issue brief collects many of these statements into a single record that underscores the sustained, demonstrable nature of the President’s anti-Muslim sentiments and the alarming degree to which those sentiments have driven his policies. Campaign Trail and Presidential Statements Though Donald Trump has been President of the United States for less than two years, he has spent decades in the public eye – first as a real estate mogul, then as a presidential candidate. As such, his words have been part of the public record long before they could dictate policy. In retrospect, they act as a compass, pointing out the direction in which President Trump would seek to steer the country when eventually given the chance. His disdain for Muslims during this pre-Presidential period was clear. During a 2011 interview with CBN’s The Brody File, for example, Trump recounted a conversation he had with disgraced former Fox News figurehead Bill O’Reilly, explaining that “O’Reilly asked me is there a Muslim problem? And I said 1 absolutely, yes.”6 Trump justified this response by declaring that “you have to speak the truth;” he then went on to discuss Islam’s holy book, opining that “[t]he Koran is very interesting…there’s something there that teaches some very negative vibe…there’s tremendous hatred out there that I’ve never seen anything like it.”7 After launching his bid for the presidency, Trump made such anti-Muslim bigotry a hallmark of his campaign.8 Indeed, as Trump made his pitch to the American public, he called for the surveillance and closure of mosques,9 the creation of a national Muslim registry,10 and the profiling of Muslim people on the basis of their religion.11 He has persistently refused to walk back his proposal to enact a ban on Muslims entering the country.12 He also repeatedly made public comments that were blatantly anti- Muslim in nature. In March 2016, for example, he declared his belief that “Islam hates us,” that Muslims harbor “unbelievable hatred,” and that it is “very hard” to demarcate the boundary between “radical Islam” and the religion as a whole.13 Once he became President, Trump immediately began putting this prejudice into action. Less than one week after taking office, he issued the first iteration of his Muslim ban,14 the most well-known provisions of which sought to ban the entry of travelers from seven overwhelmingly Muslim countries15 and suspend the admission of all refugees into the United States.16 In the midst of multiple legal challenges, two subsequent versions of the ban have since been enacted.17 While the government’s lawyers have argued that the bans should be distanced from President Trump’s record of anti-Muslim rhetoric, Trump himself has continued, as President, to make clear that each iteration of the ban has been aimed at achieving his original intent: to ban Muslims from entering the United States. Thus far, federal courts have repeatedly struck down major provisions of each version of President Trump’s Muslim ban.18 Judges in multiple courts have pointed to the voluminous record of anti-Muslim statements, including explicit calls for a ban on Muslim entry into the country, that were made by Mr. Trump during and prior to his candidacy.19 In ruling on the second Muslim ban in IRAP v. Trump, for example, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals noted that “[t]hese statements are the exact type of ‘readily discoverable fact[s]’ that we use in determining a government action’s primary purpose.”20 Looked at in context, the Court found that President Trump’s ban in fact “drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.”21 Some commentators have taken issue with such reasoning, complaining that judges have saddled President Trump with a “forever taint” that will “infect every Establishment Clause challenge ever brought against the President concerning Islam [emphasis in original].”22 Others have questioned whether a court’s “reliance on candidates’ campaign statements poses an unacceptable risk to First Amendment interests.”23 Unsurprisingly, Trump administration lawyers have also admonished the courts to ignore the President’s campaign trail comments as the judicial system considers the legality of the Muslim ban.24 But as the Fourth Circuit recently noted in its February 2018 decision finding the third Muslim ban unconstitutional, Mr. Trump’s anti-Muslim statements continued well beyond his inauguration as President, and he has never disavowed those claims. As the Court observed, “President Trump could have removed the taint of his prior troubling statements,” but “instead…President Trump continued to disparage Muslims and the Islamic faith” throughout his ongoing term in office.25 Indeed, not only has he failed to repudiate his previous comments, but he has also continued time and again to reiterate 2 the same anti-Muslim talking points that he has been inserting into public political discourse for years. President Trump, for example, did not even make it through the signature ceremony of his first Muslim ban Executive Order – entitled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry in the United States” – without reading its title aloud and remarking, “we all know what that means.”26 In the context of President Trump’s then-recent inauguration and repeated calls for a Muslim ban, there is no plausible explanation for this comment but for its role as a verbal “wink” to his expectant supporters. As successive iterations of the ban have been prevented by federal courts from going into full effect, President Trump has repeatedly lamented what he sees as the injection of “political correctness” into his exclusionary policy. Such comments include, for example, calling Muslim ban 2.0 “a watered down version of the first order” and stating his desire to “go all the way” and do “what [he] wanted to do in the first place.”27 The President has continued to make these kinds of statements, declaring, for instance, in September 2017, that “[t]he travel ban into the United States should be far larger, tougher and more specific,” but that such a policy “stupidly…would not be politically correct!”28 In context, President Trump’s juxtaposition of a ban that is both “larger” and “more specific” points with little subtlety to the fact that he would like to openly ban adherents of Islam, rather than being forced to craft a policy that targets Muslims through the proxy of their countries of origin. Much of President Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric—from his support for a Muslim registry to his justification for the Muslim ban—simultaneously draws on and perpetuates a narrative that falsely presents Islam and Muslims across the board as legitimate national security threats that warrant discriminatory treatment of the sort the President has proposed and enacted. Indeed, many of Trump’s comments point to his ongoing desire to reify this narrative and draw connections between Islam, Muslims, and terrorism whenever possible. As a candidate and as President, Trump’s inclinations in this regard frequently included his use of and reverence for the term “radical Islamic terrorism.” As discussed below, Trump’s use of this term and its variants is driven by anti-Muslim animus, and serves as a tool to be used in generating both hostility towards Muslims and support for the President’s discriminatory policies. “Radical Islamic Terrorism” The phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” has been in use for several decades.29 In recent years, however, its use has generated significant controversy, and it is often deployed as a veiled way of invoking the manifestly false idea30 that Islam and Muslims are particularly prone to violence and terrorism.